A video out of Dublin, Ireland shows shows left-wing Antifa activists protesting against an anti-pedophilia march.

The March For Innocence was organized as a protest against children’s minster Roderic O’Gorman, who is under fire for appearing in a photograph with LGBT activist Peter Tatchell in 2018.

Over the past week, O’Gorman disavowed Tatchell after learning that the campaigner supports lowering the age of sexual consent to 14-years-old providing there is no more than two or three years difference between the ages.

The rally was also a demonstration against exposing children to experimental cross-sex hormones, “extremist” sex education at a young age and drag queens.

Apparently, opposing any of this makes one a far-right fascist and subject to counter-protest by Antifa.

WATCH: Anti-Paedophilia protestors clash with Antifa during #MarchforInnocence. Article on the day's events forthcoming. pic.twitter.com/P3ElAdkCmO

— The Burkean (@TheBurkeanIE) July 11, 2020

The clip shows March For Innocence demonstrators being interrupted by Antifa radicals holding a sign that says “All You Fascists Bound to Lose.”

The leftists are immediately confronted by March For Innocence protesters, who try to grab their banner before scuffles ensue.

“Gardai intervened in one incident in which there were no injuries or arrests and remained at the scene to ensure public safety,” responded police in a statement. “All persons present later dispersed without further incident.”

Imagine thinking it’s good optics to oppose a march against pedophilia. The mind boggles.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.

Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

———————————————————————————————————————

A social experiment by Ami Horowitz shows New Yorkers gleefully signing a petition to take down statues of “slave owners” like George Washington, but suddenly becoming reticent when Horowitz mentions the Prophet Muhammad.

“I want to take down all statues of people who owned slaves in this country,” Horowitz told potential signatories, emphasizing how he wanted to remove the statue of George Washington in DC.

All of the people featured in the video gleefully signed the petition to take down statues of “slave owners” like Washington and Jefferson.

However, when it came to another infamous historical slave owner, their enthusiasm suddenly waned.

“I want to take down a statue of Muhammad, the founder of Islam, because he also owned slaves,” Horowitz tells a black woman.

“OK, I don’t want to sign this,” she responds.

Every other person in the clip refuses to sign the petition to remove statues of Muhammad.

Asked why people are signing the petition to take down Washington’s statue but not the one applying to Muhammad, one man argues that it’s because of “religious freedom.”

“But slavery’s not part of religious freedom,” responds Horowitz.

Obviously, there are no statues of the Prophet Muhammad, but nobody is calling for mosques to be demolished, despite the fact that Muhammad owned slaves.

As the BBC highlights, “The Prophet Muhammad did not try to abolish slavery, and bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves himself.”

However, the rest of the article strenuously argues that because Muhammad treated his slaves well and encouraged others to do the same, that this made his slave ownership acceptable.

The same justification probably wouldn’t go down as well when applied to Washington or Jefferson.

The social experiment underscores how slave ownership is almost certainly not the real reason for leftists wanting to see statues of Washington and Jefferson toppled.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.

Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

———————————————————————————————————————

Actor Terry Crews clashed with CNN’s Don Lemon last night during an exchange in which Lemon ludicrously asserted that black on black violence should have nothing to do with the Black Lives Matter movement.

Crews was targeted by the woke mob after he tweeted on July 4 the supposedly controversial opinion that not all white people were bad and not all black people were good.

Are all white people bad?

No.

Are all black people good?

No.

Knowing this reality- I stand on my decision to unite with good people, no matter the race, creed or ideology.

Given the number of threats against this decision-

I also decide to die on this hill.

— terry crews (@terrycrews) July 4, 2020

Before his interview on CNN last night, Crews also tweeted, “#ALLBLACKLIVESMATTER 9 black CHILDREN killed by violence in Chicago since June 20, 2020.”

#ALLBLACKLIVESMATTER

9 black CHILDREN killed by violence in Chicago since June 20, 2020

— terry crews (@terrycrews) July 6, 2020

Crews began by saying that there were “some very militant type forces in Black Lives Matter” and issuing a warning to not allow the movement to get hijacked by extremists.

Given that the ideological inspiration behind Black Lives Matter is literally a cop-killing terrorist fugitive who is on the FBI’s Top Ten Most Wanted Terrorist list, one could argue that the movement has its origins in extremism.

“When you have the leaders of the black lives movement who are now talking about…if we don’t get our demands we’re gonna burn it down, other black people who are talking about working with other whites and other races, they’re being viewed as sellouts or called Uncle Toms, you start to understand that you are now being controlled,” said Crews, adding that BLM embodied a “dangerous self-righteousness that viewed themselves as better, it was almost a supremist move, their black lives mattered a lot more than mine.”

When Crews clarified that he was talking about the leadership of BLM, Lemon asserted that Martin Luther King was once seen as extremist, leading Crews to argue that there had to be a non-racial component to BLM for it to work.

Crews then pointed to the industrial levels of black on black violence in Chicago, which in recent weeks has claimed the lives of nine black children, noting that “the Black Lives Matter movement has said nothing” about the violence.

“What does that have to do with equality though?,” responded Lemon, seriously making the argument that black people dying in massive numbers at the hands of other blacks had nothing to do with black lives mattering and was “apples and oranges,” while trying to shift the blame to “gun culture” across the entire country.

Presumably, Lemon thinks that there is no “equality” in America, yet he was unable to point out any rights that white people have that black people don’t (because they both have the exact same rights under the law).

“Black people need to hold other black people accountable, this is black America’s version of the #MeToo movement,” said Crews. “If anything’s gonna change, we ourselves, we need to look at our own communities and look at each other and say this thing cannot go down. There are a lot of great people there who are held hostage by people who literally are running these neighborhoods with violence and then claiming that black lives matter.”

Lemon then absurdly tried to argue that talking about black on black violence would be like a “cancer matters” movement being asked why they don’t talk about HIV and that BLM is solely about police brutality, another misnomer given that the full scope of BLM is about defunding the police, overthrowing capitalism and imposing communist ideals (goals that BLM front groups routinely advocate).

“When you look at the organization, police brutality is not the only thing they’re talking about,” responded Crews, prompting Lemon to agree but then contradict himself by repeating the false claim that BLM was solely about police brutality and criminal justice.

The interview ended with Crews insisting that there was more to the BLM agenda than police brutality and that it needed to be scrutinized.

Black on black violence isn’t part of the Black Lives Matter narrative because Black Lives Matter isn’t a civil rights movement, it’s a political movement and black on black violence can’t be exploited for political grist.

It’s that simple. And Don Lemon knows it.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

———————————————————————————————————————

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.

Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

———————————————————————————————————————